Let’s suppose some guy told you he was going to take something away from you. Then he proceeded to tell you precisely how he was going to do it, whether you liked it or not. Now suppose he began to do exactly what he said he was going to do, and lots of folks encouraged him because he told them he was going to give them some of your stuff.
At that point (1) would you say, “He didn’t really mean what he said, and furthermore, anyone who claims he did must be some kind of a conspiracy kook!”?… Or (2) would you do everything within your power to stop him?
Let’s just see which one you would choose.
About 15 years or so before our “Civil War”, a couple of guys named Marx and Engels devised a plan for a utopian world society. Of course they saw themselves and people of their persuasion as the directors of that dream world.
Engels produced a written design of that worldwide plan in 1847. It was called The Principles of Communism, concisely stated in 25 principles. It was written in Q & A form. For the purpose of determining your answer to the aforementioned questions, only a few of the principles will be noted.
Principle 14 – What will this new social order have to be like? “… The abolition of private property is, doubtless, the shortest and most significant way to characterize the revolution…”
Principle 17 – Will it be possible for private property to be abolished in one stroke? “No… the… revolution will transform existing society gradually…”
Principle 18 – What will be the course of this revolution? “Above all, it will establish a democratic constitution… “, and, “The main measures … are the following…” …“(i) Limitation of private property through progressive taxation, heavy inheritance taxes, abolition of inheritance through collateral lines (brothers, nephews, etc.)…”
Principle 25 – What is the attitude of the communists to the other political parties of our time? “In America, where a democratic constitution has already been established, the communists must make a common cause with the party which will turn this constitution against the bourgeoisie… “. Engels had explained that bourgeoisie meant capitalists.
In then Senator Barack Obama’s book, The Audacity of Hope, he shared that Warren Buffett, perhaps the second richest man in the world, invited him to discuss tax policy. They spent some time talking about “globalization” and other topics, but Mr. Buffett was particularly “exercised” about Pres. George Bush’s proposed elimination of the estate tax. He exclaimed, “When you get rid of the estate tax, you’re basically handing over command of the country’s resources to people who did not earn it”, that is, the surviving family members. Senator Obama concurred and further complained that the distribution of wealth was skewed and at some point “one has enough”. This might cause one to wonder, at what point would Warren Buffett and Barack Obama allow someone else to distribute their wealth?
As an added note of generally known fact, one of our political parties favors the inheritance tax, and the other does not.
Now, you are free to reconsider the two questions that were originally posed.