If the powerful use their strength merely to further their own selfish desires, in what way save in degree do they differ from the lower animals of creation? And how can man under such a moral code justify his dominion over land and sea?
"Until recently this question has never squarely faced the human race, but it does face it now and to its glory and honor it is going to be answered right. The strong will help the weak, the rich will share with the poor, and it will not be called charity, but it will be known as justice. And the man or woman who fails to do his duty, not as he sees it, but as society at large sees it, will be held up to the contempt of mankind.
What's bolded, that's clearly economic justice. Progressives have long stated that charity simply isn't enough, and that sentiment is echoed right here as well, with "not as he sees it, but as society at large sees it". Society will determine how much you should give, because you aren't giving enough, you greedy SOB.
And if you don't? "will be held up to the contempt of mankind" Then we're going to hassle you out of business with all of our institutions, the media, non profits, academia, and etc.
This is exactly how progressives today act. We've all seen it. Philip Dru has been called a blueprint of progressivism, which is certainly also how I see it, and this is just one example. For anybody who's read the book like I have, I think you'll agree with me: Barack Obama is Philip Dru.
The text of the book is in the link above, or you can also get it from Gutenberg.
Or you can listen to my audiobook recording of it. But as I told Glenn when I spoke with him in October, my first couple of recordings weren't very good. But even in Dru, I do speak clearly. It won't take you very long before you start saying to yourself the very same kinds of things I started saying; the reason why I originally started doing all of this: "It's all here." All the answers. Finally, there are answers.