As we have already seen, it was first and foremost Cobden's fight against protectionism, with the English League for the Abolition of the Corn Laws, that led Bastiat to write articles and then books.

Protectionism is, in reality, a form of economic nationalism. It aims to eliminate foreign competition while pretending to "defend national interests." They then try to get the public authorities to accept a set of purely demagogic untruths, presented as virtuous: the defense of jobs, competitiveness, etc. Of course, elected officials yield to the pressure of producers because it is a golden opportunity for them to consolidate their clientele and expand their power.

an example of promotional advertising of a blender produced in France

The argument for job protection is what Bastiat calls a fallacy. Because in reality, it is equivalent to a tax. It has the effect of making products more expensive. Let's take the example given by Bastiat himself.

Imagine an English knife that sells in our country for €2, and a knife made in France costs €3. If we let the consumer freely buy the knife he wants, he saves 1 euro, which he can invest elsewhere (in a book, or a pencil).

If we ban the English product, the consumer will pay one more unit for their knife. Protectionism thus results in a profit for a national industry, but two losses: one for another industry (in this case, the pencil industry) and the other for the consumer. On the contrary, free trade makes two happy winners.

Protectionism is also a form of class struggle. According to Bastiat, it is a system based on the selfishness and greed of producers. To increase their remuneration, farmers or industrialists demand taxes to close the market to foreign products, thus forcing consumers to pay more for their products.

Bastiat firmly sides with consumers. Against class interest, he posits the general interest, which is the interest of the consumer, that is, the interest of everyone. It is always from the consumer's point of view that the State should position itself when acting.

With the February 1848 revolution and its barricades, a more formidable enemy than protectionism would emerge, one with which it shares many affinities: socialism.

What is it? It's a political movement that advocates for the organization of labor by law, the nationalization of key industries and banks, and the redistribution of wealth through taxation. Bastiat would now devote all his energy, talent, and writings against this new doctrine, which could only lead to the exponential growth of power and perpetual class struggle. Thus, from the first days of the revolution, he contributed to a short-lived newspaper named "La République Française," which quickly became known as a counter-revolutionary journal. This was the time when he wrote his pamphlets on property, the state, plunder, and the law.

On June 27, 1848, the day after a bloody new insurrection in Paris, he dwelt in a lengthy letter to Richard Cobden on the causes that could have led to these events.

And he would continue to analyze its perverse effects thereafter. Here is one example, cited in the letter to Cobden:

To conclude, protectionists and socialists share a common point, according to Bastiat: what they seek from the law is not to ensure everyone the free exercise of their faculties and the fair reward for their efforts, but rather to favor the more or less complete exploitation of one class of citizens by another. With protectionism, it is the minority that exploits the majority. With socialism, it is the majority that exploits the minority. In both cases, justice is violated and the general interest is compromised. Bastiat sets them against each other.