Notes on the Physiocrats
Here is material on The Physiocrats I needed for a class. I pass
it along for your possible interest. Please send any corrections or
I note two flaws in the reproduction that occur when I copy this
into the text: (1) italics are lost; and (2) letters with accents
are not reproduced at all; just the accents appear alone.
In this world of new puzzles, one group of thinkers pioneered ways
to sort out the pieces and fit them together. We turn first to them,
the French "Physiocrats."
The Physiocrats - Outline
1. These Physiocrats were pioneers of applied economic analysis.
They were people of influence in the French court under Louis XV and
XVI. Their motives were benign and idealistic: to shape royal
policies to solve real social problems at home. They observed that
France, with the greatest resources and population and location, was
not living up to its potential. They were French patriots motivated
to strengthen their nation and raise the welfare of its people; but
they thought France could learn from England, whose progress and
power they admired. They preceded the English in analyzing and
articulating what the English, to some extent, practiced; and in
showing France how to improve on it.
2. They addressed problems specific to France, but in the process
developed general principles applicable to all times and places.
They wrote during "The Enlightenment," and the age of "Benevolent
Despotism," offshoots of "The Age of Reason," when
reform was in the air in every court in Europe.
3. Politically, they got "ahead of the curve," and in
France lost favor and power after 1776. (In Austria, under the
Benevolent Despot Joseph II, their influence grew until Joseph died
in 1790.) Their enemies who ousted and succeeded them paid the price
in the French Revolution, from 1789, which the Physiocrats were
trying to forestall.
4. Causes they championed:
A. Reforming obvious abuses: graft, corruption, tax- farming,
C. "Natalism" - raising the birth rate
D. Untaxing production, trade, capital formation, and parenthood
E. Focusing taxation on the net product of land (aka economic
rent), the only true taxable surplus
5. They had strong influence abroad, e.g. on Adam Smith and
6. Some of them undervalued urban production relative to farm and
other "primary" production. Another branch of Physiocrats
(Vincent de Gournay, A.R.J. Turgot) did not buy into this quirky
idea, so you may take your Physiocracy with or without it.
The Physiocrats - Narrative
1. The Physiocrats were a group of French thinkers from "The
Age of Reason" (18th Century) who mingled and found favor in
the courts of Louis XV and, briefly, Louis XVI. They were at the
core of "The Enlightenment" of the times - "Enlightenment"
meaning to apply the findings of The Age of Reason to real life.
Paris, in turn, was the leading intellectual center of Europe. Their
ideas travelled east as far as St. Petersburg (Catherine the Great),
and west as far as the new U.S.A. (Tom Paine, Tom Jefferson, and Ben
Francois Quesnay, the leading thinker, was a physician who became
personal doctor to Mme. Pompadour, favorite courtesan to Louis XV.
She also did most of the heavy thinking for Louis, who preferred
chasing stags and skirts. Quesnay's influence grew when he saved the
life of Louis' son (a life later lost to the guillotine). Quesnay
was a deep thinker and creative theorist. He explained matters in
plain French, exploiting and augmenting the clarity and utility of
that sophisticated language; but he also used intricate diagrams and
mathematics that still beguile economists. Adam Smith was his pupil.
Marquis Viktor de Mirabeau, a rich nobleman, was a humanist whose
book title, Friend of Mankind, bespoke his benign attitudes (similar
to those of Wm. Godwin whom we will meet later in England). Mirabeau
was also a "pro-natalist," meaning he favored raising the
population of France, which had been falling. Quesnay persuaded him
that the route to that was a stronger farm economy.
Pierre Samuel du Pont de Nemours was a cagy politician and
publisher who got the Physiocrats lots of good ink. He later was to
participate in the French Revolution, support a losing faction, and
yet manage to survive. In 1799 he left France for America where he
befriended Thomas Jefferson, and reinforced Jefferson's belief in
Physiocratic ideas. With his son, a chemist, he established the Du
Pont firm in Delaware, now America's most enduring family-business
dynasty. (His namesake, P.S. du Pont IV, had a run at the
Presidential nomination in 1988.)
Baron A.R.J. Turgot was a skillful and honest administrator.
Louis XVI, when newly crowned in 1774, made him Minister of Finance.
It was a time when most people saw that France needed saving from
itself. He proceeded vigorously to implement Physiocratic reforms,
and weaken special privileges, but Queen Marie Antoinette, who had
liked him once, fired him in 1776 for refusing to hire and promote
her favorites. That political mistake led him to a comfortable early
retirement, and later led her to a most uncomfortable one, as he had
Turgot came to Physiocracy through the influence of Vincent de
Gournay, rather than Quesnay. Turgot and Gournay did not buy into
the quirk for which later critics have faulted Quesnay, i.e. the
notion that commerce and industry are "sterile." They were
of one mind, though, on all practical policy issues.
2. France had a number of problems inherited from previous
A. Vast lands held by nobles (the "First Estate") and
the Clergy (the "Second Estate") were exempt from taxes.
The "Third Estate" (businessmen, workers, and plain folks)
paid the taxes.
Most revenues came from taxes on consumption and exchange (excise
taxes) and from forced labor on public works and in the military.
(Similar forced labor in Bohemia was called the "Robot,"
whence our word for a mechanical slave.) This amounted to a tax on
rearing children, which helped account for falling population in
France. (Interestingly, we are returning today to a somewhat similar
tax system, and calling it "tax reform." We no longer
force labor, except in prisons, but we do force people to pay
special taxes for working, and again when they spend to support
B. J.B. Colbert, adviser to Louis XIV, had left France with a
legacy of paternalism (or, more accurately, "dirigisme,"
which is the same buttinsky policy but without any fatherly
solicitude for the poor, infirm or aged), whereby the state
micro-directed many business and manufacturing affairs.
C. The state controlled farm prices below market levels, in a
clumsy effort to share the bounty of farms with the urban poor. To
keep the poor quiet, the state tried in this small way to appease
them for the many wrongs it did them. A harmful byproduct was to
demotivate farm production.
D. French Provinces regulated and taxed interprovincial trade, so
that France itself did not comprise one common market.
E. Actual tax collections were handled by "tax farmers,"
each of whom was sold (or corruptly given) a contract for a certain
region, and allowed to collect as much as he could force from the
people there. This kind of "farmer" had the power of the
state, without clear rules or restraints.
F. No one ever heard of a merit system in the civil service.
3. The Physiocrat's impact on power
Quesnay enjoyed favor at the court of Louis XV, thanks to the
good graces of Mme Pompadour, Louis's favorite and Quesnay's
patient. (To understand French policy, a good rule was "Cherchez
la femme.") It was the age of "The Enlightenment,"
and for a time, Quesnay reigned as a guru at its center. European
monarchs viewed themselves as "Benevolent Despots"; they
vied to patronize artists, scientists and intellectuals, and to show
their modernity and compassion by helping (or ceasing to abuse) the
poor and oppressed. Frederick the Great of Prussia, Charles III of
Spain, and Catherine the Great of Russia, among others, imported
French intellectuals and savored their ideas - French being the
universal court language.
Above all, Joseph II, Holy Roman Emperor and ruler of Austria,
bought into Quesnay's ideas, and set about enacting them with
conviction, royal power, and determination. To give you an idea of
what Joseph faced, though, his related reforms included freeing
serfs, abolishing torture, allowing freedom of worship, basing the
civil service on merit, and letting peasants marry whom they wished.
Austria was just emerging from the night of tyranny and oppression.
The ancient oppressors, including Joseph's own family, did not
appreciate his efforts. Only the people loved him.
To help you remember Joseph's time and place in history, he was
the patron of composers Gluck, Salieri and Mozart. Much has been
made of the suspicion that Salieri may have poisoned Mozart, >from
professional jealousy. That may be a coded surrogate for the more
plausible suspicion that someone did in Joseph himself, who died
young in 1790. Privilege plays rough.
Joseph's keystone reform was having all lands valued, in order to
tax them "ad valorem" (in proportion to value). That was
Quesnay's central proposal. It aroused fierce opposition >from
the First and Second Estates, who had been riding on the the Third
Estate for so long they regarded this free ride as a sacred right of
property. When Joseph died (or was he pushed?) in 1790, his brother
and successor, Leopold II, aborted his reforms, and joined the
entente against the French revolution, then just beginning. The
establishment then did its best to wipe out the memory of Joseph II,
and jeer at him. Not until the uprisings of 1848 was there an effort
to revive some of Joseph's reforms, by which time Austria had fallen
permanently behind rival powers.
Louis XVI, King of France from 1774, made a Physiocrat, Baron
Turgot, his Minister of Finance. A.R.J. Turgot was a seasoned
administrator with a "bias for action," who got right down
to it. He pushed through new laws ending, and subjecting the vast
estates of the nobles (the First Estate) and the clergy (the Second
Estate) to taxation on the Net Product. He freed trade among the
provinces, and let prices seek their own level in free markets. He
proposed to end tax farming, and wipe out many other abuses and
He also refused to let Queen Marie Antoinette pad his civil
service with her friends. She got him sacked in 1776, and his laws
repealed. (Again, Cherchez la femme. Ironically, Marie was the
sister of Joseph II of Austria.) It was tragic: Turgot might have
been one of the great lawgivers of all the ages, like Moses or
Solon. Well may he have said, "Rude prendr'essor avec les
aigles et travaillant avec les dindons" (It's hard to soar with
eagles when you work with turkeys).
Marie, meantime, began a long journey that ended on the
guillotine. Her main legacy for us is her memorable dismissal of the
starving poor, "Qu'ils mangent de brioche" (Let 'em eat
cake). She was seriously out of touch, and was to pay the price.
During this period, France got revenge on Britain by helping win the
American Revolution (some say it was France did the heavy lifting,
and the Americans who just helped). This victory did not placate the
suffering French masses, though, who took THEIR special revenge
starting July 14, 1789, when they stormed the Bastille.
4. What policies did the Physiocrats champion?
A. They would reform obvious abuses like corruption, favoritism,
undue influence, graft, and tax farming. This program was more novel
and shocking in 18th Century France than it might seem today.
B. They adopted the slogan of Laissez-faire, laissez- passer, le
monde va de lui-m___me (Let things work, let them happen, the world
goes by itself). Today, we just say "Laissez- faire." This
advice is aimed at control freaks in government. It bids them resign
as general managers of the universe, and let people produce and
trade freely, guided by market prices. Adam Smith was to borrow this
concept, and time has coupled it with his name.
Recall that at this time the spirit of J.B. Colbert was ascendant
in France. Physiocrats were reacting against his brand of extreme
dirigisme. It is unlikely they would have gone as far to the other
extreme as today's anarchists, libertarians, and Ayn-Randians.
Quesnay, like Adam Smith later, explicitly acknowledged the need for
the state to supply capital for public works, which Quesnay called
Laissez-faire meant letting prices seek their own level, free of
controls. In France of that age, that meant in particular letting
the price of grain and flour rise. This was the people's bread, but
Quesnay et al. reasoned that the people would be more than
compensated by their relief from oppressive taxes. The Treasury, in
turn, would be more than compensated by the resulting rise in land
rents, which the Treasury would tax.
Note that in France, laissez-faire meant raising the price of
grain. In England, we will see that it meant lowering the price -
for France exported grain, while England imported it. In passing
from France to England, the generic concept of laissez-faire had to
pass from the particulars of an exporting nation to those of an
C. Physiocrats were pro-natalist. This meant ending the forced
labor, and encouraging subdivision of large estates by taxing the
land. It also meant ending consumption taxes like the gabelle (salt
tax). Does a salt tax seem trivial? To us, maybe, but that tells you
something about the low living standards of that time and place.
Salt was a big item in family budgets, just as it was later in
D. They would end all taxes that are contingent on production,
labor, and trade. They would nurture capital, which they clearly
distinguished from land: creating capital, conserving it, and
turning it over. To them, taxing trade was as bad as regulating it -
they correctly perceived taxes as a form of regulating. They favored
complete free trade, including freedom from excise taxes, both
domestically and internationally - but with emphasis on the domestic
trade (unlike today's free traders, who slight domestic trade as
they hype international trade).
E. They would focus taxes on the produit net, that is the Net
Product of land after deducting all costs of improvement and
production. ("Net" is French for "clean," or "clear,"
and has been borrowed into English accounting.) We will see that the
classical English economists translated produit net as "rent."=20
Today, "rent" has taken on many confusing and conflicting
meanings, even among economists, so when in doubt, think of economic
rent as the "Net Product" of land.
They did not view this tax shift as a real shift that would raise
the tax burden on landowners, because they believed other kinds of
taxes are shifted to landowners anyway. You can't squeeze blood out
of a stone, they reasoned, so there is only one true taxable
surplus, and that is rent, the Net Product of land. For an acronym,
we will use ATCOR (All Taxes Come Out of Rent) for this Physiocratic
doctrine of tax incidence. Mirabeau's Theory of Taxation, 1760,
spelled it out. Thus, to lower the corv___e and poll and consumption
taxes, and replace them with taxes on the Net Product of land, would
not raise the end-result tax burden on landowners. This was true
even if the tax switch was "revenue neutral," i.e. would
raise as much money as taxes do now. It would even lower the total
burden on landowners.
How's that again? LOWER the total tax burden? This would result
from unleashing the great power of market incentives, incentives to
work, to save, to exchange, to produce, and to direct resources to
their best uses. Such forces are now twisted and suppressed by taxes
on capital, labor and exchange. Such twisting and suppression
constitute an "excess burden" of such taxation, a burden
NOT imposed by taxes on the Net Product.=20 This is the distinctive
Physiocratic doctrine, one that we will find repeated in Adam Smith,
David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill, and Henry George.
F. They gave a lot of thought to the role of capital in
production. They thought of capital as what we today call "front
money" - which they called "avances". They stressed
the importance of getting it back, which reflux they called "revenue"
(French for comeback). This reflux is recycled (reinvested) to
create new incomes, and the quicker the better. This was one of
their reasons for wanting to keep taxation off capital, and focus it
on the Net Product of land. This part of their analysis was
gradually lost, except among Austrian economists, who are still
trying with little success to reintroduce it into Anglophone
economics. This thread is important, but complex to follow, so we do
not treat it in this short course.
G. Composing "left" and "right" positions.
You may have noted that the Physiocrats appear "radical"
in terms of raising taxes on the rich, and lowering them on the
poor. At the same time they appear "conservative" (in
modern terms) by favoring free markets. Their genius was to show how
to accomplish both ends at once, by focusing taxes on the Net
Product of land. This is a concept that most of the polarized
pundits of today still fail to grasp, 222 years after Marie
Antoinette axed Baron Turgot. It is one of the main ideas you should
take from this course - an idea tragically missing from modern
5. Influence on Smith and Jefferson
Adam Smith traveled in France and studied for a time with
Quesnay, to whom Smith credits many of his best ideas. Neither Smith
nor Quesnay was the first to write on political economy, but most
people look back to Smith as the father of Anglophone economics.
First or not, Smith cast a long shadow: people still quote and
revere him. Few realize their debt to the Physiocrats, who passed
the baton to Smith: he published The Wealth of Nations the same year
France lost Turgot, 1776.
Thomas Jefferson also wrote a famous document in 1776. The
Declaration owes a lot to the Physiocrats. Jefferson, like Franklin,
Adams, Paine and others, had spent time in Paris. Later he knew Du
Pont and other transplanted Frenchmen in the States. Jeffersonian
land policies, the basis of western settlement in the 19th Century,
show the Physiocratic influence.
6. Primacy of agriculture?
It was Quesnay's quirk to undervalue commerce and industry. He
thought them "sterile," meaning they produced no Net
Product. This quirk found its way into English thinking, too, and
took nearly a century to be worked out. Jefferson even shipped on a
bit too much of it. Indeed, the attitude called "agricultural
fundamentalism" is still common in most nations, including
Some captious critics of Physiocracy have seized on this flaw to
try to discredit the whole structure of their thought. As noted
above, de Gournay and Turgot were devoted Physiocrats who did not
buy into the fallacy; neither should we. We may appreciate Quesnay's
positive achievements, and forgive him this trespass, as we
sometimes ask God to forgive ours.