by Jean Meslier
51. ANOTHER ABUSE: THE INDISSOLUBILITY OF MARRIAGES AND THE EVILS THIS BRINGS.
Similarly, what is the result of this other abuse that exists among them, of rendering marriages indissoluble until the death of one of the two parties? What results from this, I ask? What it leads to is an infinity of bad and unhappy marriages among them, an infinity of bad and unhappy households, in which men are miserable and unhappy with bad wives, and women are miserable and unhappy with bad husbands, which often causes the ruin or dissolution of the households. For, as many of these bad marriages and bad households as there are, in which the man and woman don’t love each other at all, and can’t peacefully endure each other, but on the contrary are constantly hating, divorcing, and dissenting against each other, they are so many miserable people, who detest and curse their marriages every day of their lives. And what increases their displeasure all the more is the realization that they can’t recant such a bad situation, and that they can’t legitimately break a bond and an engagement that is so disagreeable and disadvantageous, and sometimes so dire for them. And this ultimately leads them to such scandalous separations of bodies and goods, and sometimes even to the point of making an attempt on the life of their counterpart, so that they can completely disengage, in this way, from such an odious and insufferable bond and yoke.
What else comes from these bad marriages? This often renders the children who are born in them miserable and unhappy by the fault and misconduct of their fathers and mothers, who give them such bad daily examples, and who neglect to instruct them and have them educated as they should be in the sciences and arts, as well as in good morals. And besides, as most of those who thus enter into in marriage are poor, and were likewise raised badly, fed badly, cared for badly, and educated badly, and who have neither the means nor the capacity to do better for their children in regard to raising, feeding, caring for, and educating their children, than was done in their own case, the result is that they remain in ignorance, vulgarity, filth and grime, in poverty and misery, so much so that they are often seen to die in scarcity and suffering, or that they are unable to improve their condition, lacking life’s necessities as they do. And, as most of the masses have thus been malnourished and raised in ignorance, vulgarity, poverty, and misery, habituated from their youth to rough and painful work, and that always in dependency to and under the domination of the Rich and Powerful, which makes them almost entirely ignorant about the natural Rights of their human condition, nor the harm and injustice they suffer, by which they are made as enslaved, as miserable, and as unhappy as they are. This is also why they almost never think of escaping from such great misery, by shaking off a yoke that makes them so unhappy, but only think of living weakly in their suffering and misery, as they are used to doing, and as if they truly were born only to serve others and to live and die in poverty and misery.
What else comes from these kinds of particular and indissoluble marriages? When fathers and mothers happen to die and leave young children behind, if they are poor the children are miserable, and doubly so, they remain orphans, they remain without any support or protection, they quite often have no idea where to stop or where to withdraw to, and they are obliged, from the moment they learn to walk, to miserably beg their bread from door to door, and with this, they are so often mistreated by their stepfathers and stepmothers, who treat them with rigor and severity, and if they own anything of value, their property is often so badly handled that almost none of it remains when they come of age, which is a serious wrong done to them. All these inconveniences and problems come typically, as if necessarily, from these kinds of abuses, of which I have spoken.
52. ON THE GREAT BLESSINGS THAT WOULD COME TO MEN IF THEY LIVED IN PEACE, ALL OF THEM ENJOYING THE GOODS AND COMFORTS OF LIFE IN COMMON.
If men owned and enjoyed in common, as I have said, their wealth, the goods, and the comforts of life, if they were unanimously busy in honest and useful labor, or at least in some honest and useful exercise, and if they distributed the fruits of the Earth and their industry wisely among them, they could all live in happiness and contentment: for the Earth nearly always produces enough, and even so abundantly with food and their upkeep, if they always made a good use of these goods, and it’s only rarely that the Earth fails to produce life’s necessities; and thus, everyone would have enough to live peaceably, nobody would lack what they needs; nobody would be troubled about what they need to live or to be dressed; nobody would worry, either for their own sake or their children, about having enough to live on, or what to wear; nobody would be worried, either for their own sake or their children, about where they could live, or sleep, for everyone would find all these things in all security, abundantly, easily, and comfortably in a well-ordered community; and so nobody would have recourse to fraud, finesse, and deceit to ambush their neighbor; nobody would have recourse to the legal system to defend their property; nobody would have any reason to envy their neighbor, or to be envious of each other, since they would all, or nearly so, be in the same equality. Nobody would have any cause to steal and rob, or kill and murder anyone else, for their purse or property, since they would have nothing to gain by doing so. Nobody would even have any reason to kill themselves, so to speak, by excessive fatigue and labor, as an infinity of poor people now do, who are driven to kill themselves by fatigue and labor, to pay the fees that are harshly demanded of them. Nobody, I repeat, would have any reason to kill themselves by toil and exhaustion, since everyone would lend a hand to bear the pains of labor and nobody would stay idle.
Does this surprise you, O poor people? That you meet with such difficulties and so many troubles in life? It’s because you carry the day’s weight and heat alone, like those sowers spoken of in the Gospel, it’s because you are burdened, you and all your fellows, with the whole burden of the State; you are burdened, not only with the entire burden of your Kings and Princes, who are your first tyrants, but you are also burdened with the entire Nobility, the whole Clergy, all the Monks, the whole justice system, the whole army, all the illegitimate tax collectors, all the guards of salt and of tobacco, and finally, the whole population of layabouts and everyone who contributes nothing to the world. For it’s only from the fruits of your painful labors that all these people eat anything, they and all those who serve them. You furnish, by your labors, all their necessities, but also all that might serve for their amusements and pleasures. What would become, for example, of the greatest of the greatest Princes and Potentates on Earth, if the masses refused to sustain them? It’s only from the Masses, with whom they are, nevertheless, so harsh, it’s only from the masses that they get all their greatness, all their wealth, and all their power, in brief, they would be nothing but weak men, small like yourselves, if you didn’t support their Greatness, they would be no richer than you are, if you did not give them yours, and finally, they would have no more power or authority than you do, if you refused to submit to their laws! If all those people, whom I’ve mentioned, shared with you the toil of labor, and if they allowed you to retain, like they have, a due portion of these goods, which you win and produce so abundantly by the sweat of your brow, you would be, on one hand, far less burdened and far less worn out, and on the other, you would have far more rest and comforts in life than you have now. But no, all the toil belongs to you and your fellows, and all the blessings go to others, however less they deserve it, and this is why these poor people have so much trouble and toil in life. “One sees,” said La Bruyère in his Characters[663], “certain wild animals, both male and female, scattered in the countryside, black, livid, and quite sunburnt, who are attached to the Earth that they dig and move with an invincible stubbornness, they have, as it were, an articulate voice, and when they rise up on their legs, she reveal a human face, and indeed they are men, they retire by night into dens, where they live on black bread, on water and roots, they spare other men the trouble of planting, plowing, and gathering their sustenance, and they also deserve,” he said, “not to lack for this bread whic
h they themselves planted and got from the ground with so much trouble.” Yes, certainly, they deserve not to lack for it, they certainly deserve to eat it first, and to have the best of it, as well as to have the best of these good wines, which they also produce with so much hard work and fatigue. But, O inhuman cruelty! The Rich and Powerful in the world steal from them the best part of the Earth’s products, and leave them, so to speak, only the straw of this good grain, and the dregs of this good wine, which they have produced with such toil and trouble. The author I cited above does not say this, but he certainly implies it. Finally, if all goods were, as I’ve said, wisely governed, then nobody would have anything to fear, either for themselves or their loved ones, by way of famine or poverty, since all the goods and all the riches would be equally available to all, which would certainly the greatest boon and greatest happiness that people could ever find.
Equally, if men didn’t halt, as they do, at the vain and offensive distinctions between one family and another, and instead truly regarded and considered each other as brothers and sisters, as they should, even according to the principles of their superstitious Religions, none of them could boast or claim to be a better or of nobler birth than their fellows, and consequently they would have no cause to despise each other, or insult each other about their birth, or their family, but, each of them would find themselves respectable according to their own personal merits, not according to the imaginary merits of a supposedly better, or supposedly nobler birth, which would be of great benefit among men.
Equally, if men, especially our Christ-cultists, do not render, as they do, their marriages indissoluble, and if, on the contrary, they would always leave to both men and women the equal liberty of joining with each other, each as they are inclined, as well as the liberty to depart and separate from each other, when they no longer care for the union, or when their inclination leads them to form some other new alliance, then we would certainly not see so many bad marriages, or so many bad households as are now evident; there would not be so much dissension as there is among husbands and wives. They would not be subject to so many insults or rages as now; they wouldn’t have to mistreat each other, or curse or tear into each other so furiously, since they could freely leave each other, at the moment they stopped loving or being to each other’s taste, and since they could freely seek their bliss elsewhere. In brief, there would be no unhappy husbands or unhappy wives, as there are so many nowadays, who are miserable their whole lives, under the fatal yoke of an indissoluble marriage; on the contrary, they would always enjoy, pleasantly and agreeably, their pleasures and satisfaction together, because then friendship would be the principle or principal motive of their conjugal union, which would be a great blessing for them, as well as for the children they would bring about, because they would not be like so many poor children who remain orphaned from father and mother, and often from both together, and who, on this point, are as it were abandoned by all, and who are often seen to be miserable under the laws and authority of certain brutal step-fathers, or bad step-mothers, who starve them, and hit them, or, under the guidance of certain tutors or guardians, who neglect them and consume or waste their property. Nor would they be like so many other poor children who are miserable under the guidance of their own fathers and mothers, and who suffer, from their tenderest youth, all the miseries of poverty, the cold of winter, the heat of summer, hunger, thirst, and nakedness, who are always filthy and stinking, without education or instruction, and who are hardly able to grow at all, or improve their lot, as I’ve said, for lack of life’s necessities. But they would all be equally well raised, well fed, and well-kept in all their needs, because they would all be raised, fed, and kept in common from the public and common goods.
Equally, also would be also all be equally educated in morality and honesty, as well as in the sciences and arts, as far as it would be necessary and suitable for each of them to be, with respect to the utility and need for their knowledge, such that, when all of them are educated in the same principles of morality, and in the same rules of propriety and honesty, it would be easy to make all of them wise and upright, to have them all conspire to the same good and to render all of them capable of usefully serving their Country, which would also certainly be very advantageous for the welfare of human Society.
It’s not this way, when people are raised and educated in diverse principles of morality, and have taken various moral principles and various rules for living, for then this diversity in education, instruction, and ways of life inspires in men a contrariety and a variety of humors, opinions, and feelings, which renders them incapable of agreeing peacefully and, consequently, of aiming unanimously at the same good, causing unrest and continual divisions among them, but when they have all been raised and educated from their early years in the same moral principles, and have all learned to follow the same rules for living, then all of them will be more perfectly capable of aiming at the same good and conspiring unanimously and peacefully for the same good things.
It would, then, be far better for men to always allow liberty in Marriages and the conjugal union; it would be far better if they raised, nurtured, maintained, and also educated all their children in good morals, as well as in science and the arts. It would be far better if they esteemed and loved each other, all of them, like brothers and sisters. It would be far better for them never to make any distinctions between one family and another, and not to think that one person is from a better family, or from a nobler birth, than others. It would be far better if they were all busied with some honest work or some honest and useful exercise, each of them doing their part in the labor and discomforts of life, without unjustly wishing to leave to others all the pains and burdens, while others do nothing but take their pleasures and contentment. Finally, it would be better for them to possess all things in common and peaceably enjoy the blessings and comforts of life in common, and all that under the guidance and direction of the wise. They would certainly all be Incomparably happier and more contented than they now are: for there would be no wretched and miserable people on earth, as so many now are. This is how an ancient Philosopher speaks on this subject, Seneca, according to Posidonius, another, even more ancient Philosopher; this is what he says in Epistle 90:
In these happy times, which are called the golden age, all the goods of the earth remained in common, to be enjoyed equally by all, and before avarice and the folly of spending had broken up this society which obtained among mortals, when the community changed into a riot of looting. Nobody can praise or recommend any other way of life among humans, or give the masses morals and customs that were more praiseworthy and better than the ones that are said to have been practiced by them, among whom, by boundaries and confines, none were seen which divided the fields, all of them lived in common, the earth itself, then without any liberal sowing, brought for its fruits abundantly; where the happiest such people could be seen; nature and goods were enjoyed in common by all; it alone, as their mother, was sufficient to keep the whole world under her watchful eye, she was a very secure possession of the public wealth. Why should I not even say that this condition of men was infinitely rich, among whom nobody was poor? But greed seized upon the things that were regulated in utmost holiness, by its eagerness to take things for itself and turn them to its own advantage, it made all things belong to others, and what was an infinite possession was reduced to a small corner, it led poverty in, and by wanting much, it lost all; but still, when it rushes to gain what it has lost, while it struggles to join field to field and with money or force it drives out its neighbor, even though it extends its domains through a whole province and calls its possession the ability to travel for a long time within its own property, no tract of land, be it ever so long, will ever lead us to the place where we set out from; after we have done everything, we will have much, if you like, but we once had everything; the Earth was naturally more fertile than when it was plowed, and more lavish for the use of the peoples when they didn’t pillage it; they fou
nd as much pleasure in showing off what they had found, as in finding it, none of them could have too much or too little, all was shared among them, who were in complete agreement. The stronger had not yet set his hand on the weaker; the miser, who hid what he kept in useless reserve, had not yet deprived another of his necessities[664]. Each cared for their neighbor like themselves. Those who were protected by thick vegetation from the Sun’s heat, lived there in complete security in a small lodging covered with leaves and branches to guard against the rigors of winter and rain, passing the nights sweetly and without casting a single sigh; but cares and pains torment us in our purple and prick us with their cruel goads, but how soft was their sleep on the hard ground!
The author of the Historical Journal[665] says nearly the same thing about the men of the first times. “Happy,” he said, “were the peoples who lived in the Golden Age, and in this innocence, of which the Poet spoke”:
L’Age d’or commença, cet Age ou de l’enfance
L’homme tant qu’il vivoit conservoit l’innocence,
Et, réglant ses projets sur la seule équité,
Joignit l’exactitude à la fidélité.
Les loix, que pour punir, l’on a depuis trouvées
N’avoient point sur l’airain encore été gravées,
Et, tous en sûreté, vivant sans intérêt,
On ignoroit les noms de juges et d’arrêt[666].
Pascal[667], in his reflections, shows quite clearly that he has the same view, when he notes that the usurpation of the whole Earth and the evils that followed this, came only from the fact that each individual wanted to appropriate things that should have been left in common. “That’s my dog!” say these poor children; “That’s my spot in the sun.” Here, says this author, is the origin and the very image of the usurpation of the whole Earth. Plato, divine Plato, wanted to set up a Republic whose citizens could live in mutual understanding, and with good reason he banished from it the words mine and yours, aptly judging that as long as there was anything to share, there will always be malcontents, which leads to troubles, divisions, and trials.
