I stopped reading at page 18, as he states :

"All that can be said is, that plunder

is more visible by its partiality in protectionism,3 and by

its universality in communism; whence it follows that, of

the three systems, socialism is still the most vague, the

most undefined, and consequently the most sincere.... With this understanding, let us examine the value, the

origin, and the tendency of this popular aspiration, which

pretends to realize the general good by general plunder."

as i have not that understanding I will not go on reading, makes no sense

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

I think his affirmation is false ..

It feels like this guys is amongst a group of people, of which you seems also to be part of, that are just against communism. It is sad cause the words of this guys can and for sure has been used by nazis and fascists of any kind!

This guys i weird --- I don't like him much

Well, I am only against communism because I am for private property--and the two are incompatible in their purest forms. I think that would be his argument as well.

He's saying that they promote taxation "for the general good," but what always ends up happening is protectionism: meaning that they just enrich their pals. He's saying it's the sneakiest form of plunder to pretend it's for the "general good."